Tag: Shell

Categories
United Kingdom

January 27, 1967 – James Lovelock told to keep schtum about climate change by Shell science boss

Fifty seven years ago, on this day, January 27th 1967,

Rothschild’s response was to insist that Lovelock refrain from discussing the topic—“the weather getting colder, and the cause possibly being fossil fuel combustion products in the atmosphere”—with “non-Shell people.”14 He encouraged Lovelock to continue his visits to NCAR in order to “monitor the work [being] done” on the issue.

14. Rothschild, letter to Lovelock, 27 Jan. 1967, box 76, part 3, Archive Collection of Professor James Lovelock. 

This is quoted in Leah Aronowsky’s excellent paper (see references below).

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 322ppm. As of 2024 it is 422ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Lovelock had written this paper with the Shell people, and had been been told to shut up. Partly presumably for fear of alarming the savages, and getting in the way of I didn’t know further coal and oil exploration?

What happened next? Lovelock as far as I know, did keep schtum.  But then, Victor Rothschild, boss of science for Shell, was his friend…

Lovelock, J. 2000. Homage to Gaia.

That was good question. When did Lovelock start going public? And this is the kind of thing you can use to generate questions for further study. 

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

References

Aronowsky, L. (2021). Gas guzzling Gaia, or: a prehistory of climate change denialism. Critical Inquiry, 47(2), 306-327

Also on this day: 

January 27, 1989 – UN General Assembly starts talking #climate

January 27, 1986 – Engineers try to stop NASA launching the (doomed) Challenger Space Shuttle

Categories
Uncategorized

January 24, 1967 – Senior British scientist says “by no means can (C02) report be dismissed as science fiction”…

Fifty seven years ago, on this day, January 24th, 1967,

Such a forecast was certainly disquieting. Upon reviewing the document, Graham Sutton, inaugural chairman of Britain’s recently established Natural Environment Research Council, stressed that “by no means” should the report be “dismissed as ‘science fiction,’” though he conceded that “one cannot yet tell if the decline in temperature is part of an old old story of natural fluctuations or is something triggered off or enhanced by pollution.”13

13. Graham Sutton, letter to Victor Rothschild, 24 Jan. 1967, box 76, part 3, Archive Collection of Professor James Lovelock.

Leah Aronowsky, 2021

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 322ppm. As of 2024 it is 422ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Graham Sutton, former Met Office boss, was head of the newly established Natural Environment Research Council and probably wanted to have a relative lid on such seemingly outlandish claims. And you see the sorts of claims of responsible men to damp and things down but fairplay to Sutton he didn’t do that. 

By now, the BBC had already broadcast Challenge, in January of 1967…

But then what did Sutton do? What did NERC do? It’s a good question. 

What we can learn. There were conversations going on among scientific elites about this. 

What happened next the following year, July 1968. Lord Kennett made what’s so far the earliest mention of the greenhouse effect by an elected politician (or at least a minister in an elected government!). Then in 1970, in August, it blew up publicly. And here we are. 

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

References

Aronowsky, L. (2021). Gas guzzling Gaia, or: a prehistory of climate change denialism. Critical Inquiry, 47(2), 306-327

Also on this day: 

January 24, 1984 – Canadian TV documentary and discussion about #climate 

January 24, 2017 – Climate activist is court in the act

Categories
United Kingdom

The Guardian holds a climate summit. We. Are. Saved. June 15, 2009.

Fourteen years ago, on this day, June 15, 2009, the Grauniad tried to get everyone together in a room at a climate summit “Moving from awareness to action in tough economic times”

Sponsored by Shell. Obvs.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 389.7ppm. As of 2023 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that every man and their dog were talking about climate change – had been since the second half of 2006. And now the Copenhagen Climate Summit was going to be the icing on the cake. So of course, a quote left of centre, but actually centrist newspaper has to bring together the bien-peasants (sic) and business to show that it is a responsible corporate citizen. And there is lots of talk about technology and social change and expectations. Because there are reputations to be burnished and logs to be rolled and mutual back-scratching of various intensity. And how else do you know if you’re alive, unless you’re on one of these platforms being obediently listened to? 

What I think we can learn from this

What we learn is that the cycle goes on, and that everyone has their stable place in the emotacycle and the corporate emotacycle. But no one asks question “Gee, what have we been doing wrong?” 

What happened next

Copenhagen was predictable and predicted catastrophe. But everyone keeps on same day. 

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Categories
Canada

January 20, 2011 – Shell tries to change the subject from its own emissions   

January 20, 2011 – Shell tries to change the subject from its own emissions   

Twelve years ago, on this day, January, 20, 2011, Shell tried to change the subject.

“After being called by an official from Royal Dutch Shell regarding the April 2011 conference in Banff, Alta., that was to focus on “less controversial” aspects of the climate-change debate, such as energy efficiency and transportation demand management, [Canadian associate assistant deputy minister Mike] Beale felt compelled to state what was missing. “I had to point out – nicely – that the initiative seems to sidestep the gorilla in the room of emission reductions from O&G (oil and gas), but that otherwise, it seems like a great idea,” wrote Beale in the Jan. 20, 2011 email, released to Postmedia News through access to information legislation.”

http://mikedesouza.com/2012/09/27/oil-and-gas-is-gorilla-in-room-on-feds-climate-change-policies-environment-canada/

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 391.5ppm. As of 2023 it is 419.

The context was that the post-Copenhagen conversation was grinding on (just because Canada had pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol, that didn’t mean the ant-climate action folks had downed tools).

This should also be seen in the context of Shell’s multi-decade efforts at minimising, distracting and subject-changing (they don’t do outright denial anymore, it’s all about the predatory delay).

What I think we can learn from this

Trying to have an honest conversation about what we are up against and what needs to be done will continue to be difficult when your interlocutors want to derail the conversation, and will use subtle means to do it sometimes….

What happened next

Shell has indulged in all sorts of cool-washing, involving hipster women  and also Jean-luc Godard rip offs. 

On existentialism, guilt, Godard and … Shell’s corporate framing strategy

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong?  Do comment on this post.

Categories
United Kingdom

October 8, 1959 – Shell says “nothing to see here” on carbon dioxide build-up

On this day, October 8 in 1959, an article appeared in New Scientist (then a pretty new publication)  by Dr M.A. Matthews, employed by Shell. It cast doubt on idea of carbon dioxide increase having any effect on climate

1959 Shell “The Earth’s Carbon Cycle” Article

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 313.33ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm – but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – The International Geophysical Year had focussed on many things, including the atmosphere. Academic articles were beginning to appear looking at carbon dioxide build-up.  Already through the 1950s various scientists had begun to speculate…

Categories
Carbon Capture and Storage Technophilia

June 25, 2002, 2003 and 2008 – CCS’s first hype cycle builds

On this day, June 25, across 6 years, we can watch a technology emerge from obscurity (see June 4 for how an issue goes through an arc).

Carbon capture and storage is the proposal to stop carbon dioxide molecules, released when you burn a hydrocarbon (oil, coal or gas), from getting into the atmosphere. I could go on, but I won’t…

On this day in 2002 the UK Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) held an “ Improved Oil Recovery” Research Seminar.

Then, a  year later the US, EU, 12 countries agreed to develop carbon capture technologies” – the grandly named “Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum” became a thing.

Then, five years after that, with CCS very high up the agenda in the UK,  a Shell-sponsored CCS supplement turned up in the Guardian  containing 14-articles, all focusing on CCS. Page 234 of Mander et al (2013)

Why this matters. 

Technologies build up a head of, erm, steam. Or they don’t. It takes time for things to emerge. Then they work, or they don’t, or they do something else.

What happened next?

CCS? It went away. Then it came back, as fantasies do.